ML14283A597
| ML14283A597 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/2014 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-1069 | |
| Download: ML14283A597 (50) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Sequoyah License Renewal Public Meeting - Evening Session Docket Number:
(n/a)
Location:
Soddy Daisy, Tennessee Date:
Wednesday, September 17, 2014 Work Order No.:
NRC-1069 Pages 1-50 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
+ + + + +
2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
+ + + + +
4 OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION 5
+ + + + +
6 SEQUOYAH PUBLIC MEETING 7
+ + + + +
8 WEDNESDAY 9
SEPTEMBER 17, 2014 10
+ + + + +
11 SODDY DAISY, TENNESSEE 12
+ + + + +
13 14 The meeting convened at Soddy Daisy City 15 Hall, 9835 Dayton Pike, Soddy Daisy, Tennessee, at 7:00 16 p.m.
17 PRESENT:
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 P R O C E E D I N G S 1
(7:00 p.m.)
2 MR. HAGAR: Good evening to everyone. My 3
name is Bob Hagar, I'm a member of the NRC's meeting 4
facilitation corps and in this meeting my role really 5
has three parts.
6 One is I'm going to try to keep us on track, 7
help this meeting run smoothly. I'm going to ensure that 8
everyone who has something to say in this meeting has 9
an opportunity to say it without interruption and I'll 10 try to keep us on schedule.
11 I'll do my best to make this meeting 12 worthwhile for everyone who's here and I hope you'll 13 help me do this.
14 Before we get started, I want to cover with 15 you a few details about this meeting. First of all you 16 know the Tennessee Valley Authority has applied to renew 17 the Sequoyah operating license. The NRC is reviewing 18 that application and, as part of that review, the review 19 on the environmental impact of license renewal.
20 The NRC has developed some preliminary 21 results of that review and they want to tell you about 22 those results today and they want your comments on those 23 results. That's the primary purpose of this meeting.
24 Now the meeting is going to have 25
3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 essentially three parts. The first part is going to be 1
the NRC's presentation. They'll talk about the license 2
renewal process, they'll talk about the environmental 3
reviews.
4 Now copies of their presentation were on 5
the table outside, if you didn't pick up a copy on the 6
way in you can certainly pick them up on the way out.
7 And following the NRC's presentation we'll 8
take a few minutes for you to ask questions and for the 9
staff to give you answers about the presentation 10 materials because it's real important that you 11 understand the environmental review process and the 12 results. And so we'll have questions and answers about 13 those materials.
14 And then following that we'll have the 15 third part which is going to be public comments. Now, 16 when you checked in the staff asked you if you wanted 17 to speak and if you did you filled out a little yellow 18 card and I've got several of those now. If, during the 19 presentation you decide you want to speak and you didn't 20 fill out a yellow card, don't worry about it. When we 21 get to that part of the meeting I'll ask if there's 22 anybody else that wants to speak and if so we'll give 23 you a yellow card at that time. But then that's when 24 you'll have an opportunity to provide comments.
25
4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Now during that period, the NRC staff will 1
listen to your comments but they generally won't 2
respond. Instead, they'll take your comments and your 3
comments are going to be recorded, they'll take those 4
comments back to headquarters and prepare written 5
responses after the meeting.
6 They'll refer to the appropriate 7
documents, talk to the right people, make sure they get 8
the best answer to your questions and then they'll 9
include their responses in the report of this meeting 10 and that report will be available online.
11 Now the NRC has arranged to have this 12 meeting recorded. That's so the NRC can produce a 13 transcript, that's a record of what was said during the 14 meeting. In order for the transcript to be accurate, 15 we need to establish a few ground rules to ensure the 16 recording is clear and complete.
17 So first of all, when you speak, you need 18 to speak into a microphone and we've only got one 19 microphone for you to use and this is it. So if you have 20 a question I'll call you up to the microphone, ask you 21 to speak your question into the microphone and then I'll 22 ask the NRC staff to come up to the microphone and 23 provide the responses. That way both the question and 24 the response will get recorded.
25
5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Now the first time you speak we'd ask you 1
to please identify yourself and, if you represent a 2
group, identify the group you represent and also if your 3
name is relatively uncommon or if it has an unusual 4
spelling it'll help if you spell your name too.
5 Now to ensure that the recording is clear 6
please minimize background noise and don't hold side 7
conversations, especially please silence your 8
personal cell phone and any personal electronics you 9
have with you.
10 Now I recognize you may not be able to 11 completely disconnect yourself from the rest of the 12 world during this meeting and if you do need to stay 13 connected and if you receive a call during the meeting, 14 please step out in the hallway to take that call so that 15 the phone ringing doesn't show up on the recording and 16 your conversation isn't part of the record either.
17 And to ensure that the recording is clear, 18 please don't hold any side conversations because if you 19 hold a side conversation the microphone picks up two 20 people talking and we can't tell what either one of them 21 said. Is everybody okay with these ground rules?
22 Okay. Thanks.
23 Now I mentioned the yellow cards. I think 24 I've got three of them so far. When we get to the third 25
6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 part of the meeting I'll call up speakers in the order 1
in which I have them on the cards and, like I said, if 2
you decide during the meeting you want to speak, just 3
let me know and I'll have you fill out a card.
4 Also out on the table you may have noticed 5
there are meeting feedback forms; we'd appreciate very 6
much if you would fill out one of those feedback forms 7
and give us your assessment of this meeting. Give your 8
form to any NRC staff member before you leave or if you 9
take it with you, you can drop it in the mail because 10 it's postage free. Your assessment of how tonight's 11 meeting went will help us improve future meetings so 12 please take a minute to let us know what you think.
13 And, finally, the restroom are just outside 14 this door across the hall. Emergency exit is outside 15 this door and to the right, if for some reason we're 16 going to have to exit quickly, out the door and to the 17 right. And security members are located sitting in the 18 back and they'll help us if we have an emergency.
19 Do you have any questions about anything 20 I've talked about? All right. I don't see any hands 21 so I'm going to turn the meeting over to David Drucker.
22 He's the Environmental Project Manager for the NRC's 23 review of the Sequoyah license renewal application and 24 I'll be back when we move to the second part of the 25
7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 meeting. Thank you for your attention.
1 MR. DRUCKER: Thank you, Bob. And as Bob 2
mentioned I'm David Drucker and I want to thank you all 3
for coming out to the meeting tonight and I'd like to 4
introduce my boss who's Brian Wittick and he's sitting 5
back here in the second row.
6 We're both from NRC headquarters back in 7
Rockville, Maryland and I hope the information we 8
provide with this presentation will help you understand 9
what we've done so far and the role you can play in 10 helping us make sure the final environmental impact 11 statement is accurate and complete.
12 I would like to emphasize that the 13 environmental review is not yet complete.
14 I'd like to start off by briefly going over 15 the agenda and the purpose of this presentation. I will 16 discuss the NRC's regulatory role, the preliminary 17 findings of our environmental review which addresses 18 the impacts associated with extending the operating 19 licenses of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant for an additional 20 20 years, and I will present the current schedule for 21 the remainder of the environmental review and how you 22 can submit comments outside of this meeting.
23 At the end of the presentation there will 24 be time for questions and answers on the contents of my 25
8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 briefing and, most importantly, time for you to present 1
your comments on the draft supplemental environment 2
impact statement, the acronym for which is SEIS, so 3
you'll hear me refer to this document that we've 4
developed as a SEIS.
5 Next slide please. The NRC was 6
established to regulate civilian use of nuclear 7
materials, including facilities producing electric 8
power. The NRC conducts license renewal reviews for 9
plants whose owners wish to operate them beyond their 10 initial license period.
11 NRC license renewal reviews address safety 12 issues related to managing the effects of aging and 13 environmental issues related to an additional 20 years 14 of operation.
15 In all aspects of the NRC's regulation our 16 mission is threefold: to ensure adequate protection 17 of public health and safety; to promote common defense 18 and security and to protect the environment.
19 Next slide. We're here tonight to discuss 20 the potential site-specific impacts of license renewal 21 for the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. The generic 22 environmental impact statement, or GEIS, examines the 23 possible environmental impacts that could occur as a 24 result of renewing licenses of individual nuclear power 25
9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 plants.
1 The GEIS established and bounds the 2
significance of these potential impacts. The analyses 3
in the GEIS pertain to operating power reactors. For 4
each type of environmental impact the GEIS establishes 5
generic findings covering as many plants as possible.
6 For some environmental issues the GEIS 7
found that a generic evaluation was not sufficient and 8
that a plant-specific analysis was required. The 9
site-specific findings for Sequoyah are contained in 10 the draft SEIS published in July 2014 and I have both 11 a hard copy and CD of that draft SEIS on the table just 12 outside this room.
13 This document contains analyses of all 14 applicable site-specific issues as well as a review of 15 the issues covered by the GEIS, the generic 16 environmental impact statement, to determine whether 17 the conclusions in the GEIS are valid for Sequoyah.
18 In this process, the NRC staff also reviews 19 the environmental impacts of potential power generation 20 alternatives to license renewal.
21 Next slide. So for each of the 22 environmental issues that are examined in the draft SEIS 23 an impact level is assigned and the NRC's standard of 24 significance for impacts was established using the 25
10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 White House Council on Environmental Quality 1
terminology for significance.
2 The NRC established three levels of 3
significance for potential impacts: small, moderate and 4
large as defined on the slide.
5 For a small impact the effects are not 6
detectable or so minor they will neither destabilize nor 7
noticeably alter any important attribute of the 8
resource.
9 For a moderate impact the effects are 10 sufficient to alter noticeably but not to destabilize 11 important attributes of the resource, and for a large 12 impact the effects are clearly noticeable and are 13 sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the 14 resource.
15 While these impact level designations are 16 used for most of the resource areas analyzed in the draft 17 SEIS, there are three areas that have their own impact 18 level designation and these are discussed on the next 19 slide.
20 So for special status species the impact 21 significance determination language comes from the 22 Endangered Species Act and the choices to describe the 23 impacts are: no effect; may affect but not likely to 24 adversely affect and may affect and is likely to 25
11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 adversely affect.
1 For cultural resources the Natural 2
Historic Preservation Act requires federal agencies to 3
consider the effects of their undertakings on historic 4
properties and for environmental justice, under 5
Executive Order 12898, federal agencies are responsible 6
for identifying and addressing disproportionately high 7
and adverse human health environmental impacts on 8
minority and low income populations.
9 So this slide and the previous one kind of 10 define for you what the impact level designations are 11 going to be. Aand now we're going to take a look at 12 that, both the cumulative impacts first and then the 13 site-specific ones at Sequoyah.
14 Next slide please. So as a part of the 15 environmental review the NRC staff considered 16 cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts include the 17 effects on the environment from other past, present and 18 reasonably foreseeable future human actions. So "other" 19 is the key word there. Other is other than Sequoyah 20 because we'll look at that in the next slide.
21 These effects not only include the 22 operation of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant but also impacts 23 from activities unrelated to Sequoyah such as future 24 urbanization, other energy producing facilities in the 25
12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 area and climate change.
1 The analysis considers potential impacts 2
through the end of the current license term, as well as 3
the 20-year renewal license term. The cumulative 4
impacts on all resource areas were found to be small with 5
the following exceptions:
6 First, the cumulative impacts on surface 7
water would be small to moderate primarily due to 8
long-term surface water warming associated with climate 9
change.
10
- Second, the cumulative impacts on 11 terrestrial resources would be moderate, primarily due 12 to increasing urbanization.
13 Next, the cumulative impacts on aquatic 14 resources would be large, primarily due to the 15 historical changes to the Tennessee River since the 16 early 1900s. And the cumulative impact on global 17 climate change would be moderate, primarily due to 18 present and future global emissions of greenhouse 19 gasses.
20 Next slide. So we've taken the broad view, 21 we've looked at cumulative impacts, things that go far 22 beyond the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant and now we're going 23 to look at the site-specific impacts at Sequoyah Nuclear 24 Plant of this license renewal.
25
13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And that's what this slide lists. It's the 1
issues that the NRC staff reviewed for continued 2
operation of Sequoyah during the proposed license 3
renewal period.
4 And so for each of these areas there are 5
scientific experts, if you will, and for example in the 6
terrestrial resources we have a terrestrial biologist 7
who would look at those resources. And each of those 8
areas is backed up by folks who do those areas for a 9
living.
10 Overall, the impacts for license renewal on 11 these issues were found to be small, which means the 12 effects are not detectable or are so minor that they 13 neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important 14 attribute of the resource.
15 Next slide. The National Environmental 16 Policy Act mandates that each environmental impact 17 statement consider alternatives to any proposed major 18 federal action.
19 A major step in determining whether 20 license renewal is reasonable or not is comparing the 21 likely impacts of continued operation of the nuclear 22 plant with the likely impacts of alternative means of 23 power generation. Alternatives must provide an option 24 that allows for power generation capability beyond the 25
14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 term of the current nuclear plant operating license to 1
meet future system generating needs.
2 In the draft SEIS, NRC staff initially 3
considered 18 different alternatives, then narrowed 4
those to 4 alternatives and considered those 4 5
alternatives in depth.
6 Additionally, the NRC considered what 7
would happen if no action is taken and Sequoyah shuts 8
down at the end of its current licenses without a 9
specific replacement alternative. This alternative 10 would not provide power generation capacity nor would 11 it meet the needs currently met by Sequoyah.
12 The NRC's preliminary conclusion is that 13 the environmental impacts of renewal of the operating 14 license for Sequoyah would be smaller than those 15 feasible and commercially viable alternatives.
16 Continued operation would have small environmental 17 impacts in all areas. The staff concluded that 18 continued operation of the existing Sequoyah nuclear 19 power plant is the environmentally preferred 20 alternative.
21 Next slide. So based on a review of likely 22 environmental impacts from license renewal, as well as 23 potential environmental impacts of alternatives to 24 license
- renewal, the NRC staff's preliminary 25
15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 recommendation in the draft SEIS is that the adverse 1
environmental impacts of license renewal for Sequoyah 2
are not great enough to deny the option of license 3
renewal to energy planning decision makers.
4 Next slide. The draft SEIS does not 5
discuss potential environmental impacts for storing 6
spent fuel for an extended period after the plant shuts 7
down. For the term beyond the 20-year period of 8
extended operation, the NRC addresses the management of 9
spent nuclear fuel in the continued storage final rule.
10 On August 26, 2014 the Commission approved 11 publication of a continued storage final rule and the 12 generic environmental impact statement that supports 13 it.
14 Under the final rule, the environmental 15 impacts of continued storage are generically determined 16 in new Reg 2157 titled "Generic Environmental Impact 17 Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel" 18 and codified those findings in NRC's Regulations at 10 19 CFR 51.23. And therefore those impacts do not need to 20 be determined on a site-specific basis and that's why 21 they're not addressed here in this draft SEIS.
22 Next slide. I would like to reemphasize 23 that the environmental review is not yet complete.
24 Your comments today and all written comments received 25
16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 by the end of the comment period on September 29th, will 1
be considered by the NRC staff as we develop the final 2
SEIS which we currently plan to issue in March 2015.
3 Those comments that are within the scope of 4
the environmental review and provide new and 5
significant information can help change the staff's 6
findings. The final SEIS will contain the staff's 7
final recommendation on the acceptability of license 8
renewal based on the work we've already performed and 9
any new and significant information we receive in the 10 form of comments during the comment period.
11 Next slide. As many of you know, I'm the 12 primary contact for the environmental review. Manny 13 Sayoc is the primary contact for the safety review.
14 Copies of the draft SEIS are available on CD as I 15 mentioned in the entryway, and in addition the three 16 libraries shown on the slide have a hard copy available 17 for review. You can also find electronic copies of the 18 draft SEIS, along with other information about the 19 Sequoyah Buclear plant license renewal review online at 20 the website shown.
21 And this is I think the second slide I've 22 shown with a website, pretty long and hard to write down 23 from sitting where you are and so also out on the table 24 in the entryway are these slides, copies of these slides 25
17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 so you can get the website from those slides available 1
to you in the entryway.
2 Next slide. So the NRC staff will address 3
written comments in the same way we address spoken 4
comments received today. You can submit written 5
comments either online or via conventional mail.
6 To submit written comments online visit the 7
website regulations.gov and search for Docket ID No.
8 NRC-2013-0037. And if you have written comments today 9
you may give them to any NRC staff member. If you choose 10 to put your comments in online at regulations.gov when 11 you go onto that website you get to see anyone else's 12 comments that they've made and also there's a copy of 13 the DSEIS there also if you want to see it.
14 This concludes my presentation and I will 15 turn the meeting back over to Bob. Thank you all.
16 MR. BAGAR: All right. Thank you, David.
17 Okay. Here's where we enter Part 2 of the meeting. This 18 is where you ask questions and the NRC staff gives you 19 answers about the presentation materials. So do you have 20 any questions about the presentation materials?
21 If you do, let me call on you and I want you 22 to come up here and state your question and then we'll 23 get the staff to respond.
24 MR. MORGAN: I'm Gary Morgan. I'm with 25
18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 an environmental group called Blue Ridge Environmental 1
Defense League in our local chapter which is the 2
Belefonte Efficiency and Sustainability Team and 3
Mothers Against Tennessee River Radiation 4
(BEST/MATRR).
5 Just for clarification, I saw on the slide 6
and it was mentioned about nuclear waste. Are you all 7
not going to consider the highly irradiated fuel in this 8
current environmental impact statement? I just want to 9
clarify that if I can do that here.
10 MR. DRUCKER: So what you'll find in the 11 environmental impact statement is that we address spent 12 fuel through the license renewal period, which is 20 13 years, but not beyond the license renewal period. That's 14 what the continued storage rule will address. But the 15 environmental impact statement does talk to waste 16 storage, spent fuel, through the 20-year license 17 renewal period. Does that help?
18 MR. MORGAN: It actually kind of confuses 19 the matter. To my way of thinking it either is 20 considered or it's not going to be considered. So I'm 21 still not sure if this is going to be considered or not 22 or the issue should be addressed from a citizen's 23 standpoint of concern.
24 MR. HAGAR: Let me try to answer. As I 25
19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 understand your question you're asking is the NRC going 1
to consider the environmental impact of spent fuel 2
storage during license renewal? And the answer is yes, 3
the NRC is going to consider it but not part of this SEIS 4
because it's considered under this, what's the term 5
again--
6 MR. DRUCKER: The best answer is yes.
7 The NRC thoroughly studies spent fuel. The NRC looks at 8
this in many different respects, whether it's spent fuel 9
pools or in the ISFSFs those independent spent fuel 10 storage facilities, thoroughly examine this topic.
11 But the way we divided up in environmental 12 space, actually you can think of it in the National 13 Environmental Policy Act space, in NEPA space, is that 14 in this draft supplemental environmental impact 15 statement we're only looking at spent fuel during the 16 license renewal period because that's what this 17 document, that's what this effort is all about. It's 18 all about the license renewal period.
19 And when it comes to the time beyond the 20 license renewal period, that's covered by that slide 21 that talked about continued storage. It used to be the 22 waste confidence rule, it's now called the continued 23 storage rule and in August the Commission made that the 24 final rule. It will actually be published later this 25
20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 month. It will be issued and then 30 days hence the 1
continued storage rule will be effective.
2 And so, yes, this issue is thoroughly 3
studied by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It's 4
just kind of -- it's the way we divide it up as far as 5
looking at it in license renewal space, which only goes 6
out 20 years, versus spent fuel which will be around 7
beyond that.
8 MR. MORGAN: I understand what you're 9
saying but still highly irradiated spent fuel in a fuel 10 pool or in dry storage or however it may be stored, has 11 a definitive, may have a definitive impact on human 12 health and the environment. To say you're not going to 13 consider this in the approval of, you know, I don't know.
14 I'm still confused here. I'm still not hearing whether 15 this is to be considered or it's not to be considered.
16 MR. DRUCKER: It is being considered.
17 MR. MORGAN: And so it is appropriate then 18 for a citizen to address this topic.
19 MR. HAGAR: Okay. Very good. Does anyone 20 else have any questions about the material that was 21 presented? Come on.
22 MR. SAFER: I'm Don Safer S-a-f-e-r, like 23 nuclear power plants ought to be, and I'm from 24 Nashville. I'm with the Tennessee Environmental 25
21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Council and the state chapter of the Sierra Club.
1 I have a couple of questions. One is that 2
the GSEIS, as you're referring to it, was originally 3
produced in 1996 a number of years ago. It was updated 4
in 2013. My question is how extensive were those 5
updates? 1996 seems like an awful long time ago and 6
I'm wondering, you know, if you just changed a few things 7
or if you basically redid the whole document.
8 MR. DRUCKER: Actually, the document 9
itself can do a much better job than I can of talking 10 to that and there was a copy out in the hall. Gretel, 11 did you grab that copy of the GSEIS? Did you grab that 12 document, that thick one? Because it's got a good 13 summary that'll tell you the changes in great detail 14 between the 1996 -- okay, actually we've got it on CD 15 also Don so you can grab that. And there's an excellent 16 section in there that talks to the changes in just a few 17 short pages between the 1996 and the 2013 document.
18 Trying to do it from memory would be a 19 little tough for me but we had about 90 issues that we 20 used to look at -- 92 issues if memory serves -- and we 21 have through consolidation of some of those issues it's 22 down to 78 and I think if you looked in my document you 23 would say 78 separate issues are looked at on a 24 site-specific basis.
25
22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 There were some new issues that were 1
brought into the new GSEIS, like radionuclides in water, 2
in groundwater, is the first one that comes to mind is 3
a new issue that was entered into the new GEIS and 4
therefore you'll find it here in my SEIS.
5 So I think it was a very thorough, overall 6
a very thorough update to the document.
7 MR. SAFER: Thanks. In reviewing the 8
alternatives to finishing the plant or renewing the 9
license, extending the license, I notice you talk about 10 the consideration of renewables and how extensive was 11 that consideration and how current was the information 12 in the SEIS; it acknowledges that things are changing 13 so rapidly that it's hard to keep up and I think it's 14 a critical issue.
15 MR. DRUCKER: Great question. On page 16 2-4 of the draft SEIS you'll find a listing of the 17 alternatives that were considered -- the 18 of them --
18 and right at the top there is wind power and solar power, 19 conventional hydroelectric power, geothermal power, so 20 there's a number of them that I think that address that.
21 And I think if you go through there you'll 22 see why those were not studied in great detail and it 23 does I think a very good solid job of explaining why we 24 ended up with the four -- natural gas, super-critical 25
23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 pulverized coal, new nuclear and a combination of wind 1
and solar -- as our four alternatives that were most 2
seriously considered.
3 MR. SAFER: Thank you. And I realize 4
this part of the discussion is for questions regarding 5
the presentation so I'll have some more statements about 6
the renewables which I think are really a key issue in 7
whether the plant should go another 20 years or not, 8
beyond 2020 and 2021. Thank you.
9 MR. HAGAR: Very good. Thank you, Don.
10 Does anyone else have a question about the presentation 11 materials?
12 MS. JOHNSTON: Hello, my name is Gretel 13 Johnston and I'm with BEST/MATRR and I had a question 14 also about the alternatives, something that I've 15 commented on every time. And again I see that energy 16 efficiency was not included in the list of alternatives.
17 And even one of the commissioners, not commissioners but 18 directors of the TVA, Board of Directors, who is 19 published considerably on energy efficiency has given 20 us information showing how well it can replace the need 21 for more nuclear power in the Southeast.
22 And I've given you numerous references, 23 submitted the documents as well as links to documents, 24 showing how energy efficiency can replace this need for 25
24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 more nuclear and can replace the need for Sequoyah right 1
now and can in fact provide energy needs for the future.
2 MR. HAGAR: Pardon me, Gretel, did you 3
have a question about the presentation material?
4 MS. JOHNSTON: Yes. My question is why 5
is energy efficiency not included as one of the 6
alternatives to re-licensing Sequoyah for 50 percent 7
beyond its design basis life span?
8 MR. DRUCKER: Thanks Gretel. As you look 9
at the alternatives in Chapter 2 of the DSEIS, you know, 10 energy efficiency and demand site management did make 11 the cut of the 18 but it didn't get into the top 4. And 12 pages 2-20 and 2-21 explains NRC staff reasoning as to 13 why it didn't make it into the top 4. And I think it lays 14 out its case pretty well and rather than read it here, 15 you know, you'll have the document, give it a read 16 through and if you have questions let me know. Thanks.
17 MR. HAGAR: And that prompts me to remind 18 you all that the period for comment isn't closed with 19 this meeting, that until September 29th, you can submit 20 comments in writing, you can certainly provide comments 21 tonight, but if you take the study home and read it and 22 have more comments, provide those either online or in 23 writing before September 29th and the staff will respond 24 to them.
25
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 So does anyone else have questions about 1
the presentation material? All right. Then we'll 2
move to Part 3 of the meeting, the third part, and this 3
is where the NRC staff is asking for comments on anything 4
related to what we've talked about tonight. So far only 5
three people have signed up. Does anyone else want to 6
speak that has not filled out a yellow card yet? All 7
right.
8 Then in the order in which I have the cards, 9
Gretel you're first and then Don you're next and I'd ask 10 you to please limit your comment to five minutes until 11 we cycle through all three of you and then if we need 12 more you can go a second time. All right?
13 MS. JOHNSTON: Hello, I'm Gretel Johnston 14 with Bellefonte Efficiency and Sustainability team, 15 Mothers Against Tennessee River Radiation and that's 16 BEST/MATRR and we are a local chapter in the Tennessee 17 Valley of the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League.
18 BREDL.
19 I got a little irritated this morning and 20 it's because I was having such a hard time over a 21 three-day period that I had kind of blocked out time for 22 myself to focus on this report because I'm a working 23 person and it's difficult to find the time to review 24 these long, long documents.
25
26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And I was kind of familiar with the earlier 1
ones because I've been reviewing them but I kept asking 2
people do you know how to find the new one? And people 3
said oh what new one? And I was like there's got to be 4
a new one because they're calling it the DSEIS instead 5
of the SEIS.
6 And so I spent hours online and I am 7
internet savvy but something that is a recurring problem 8
with the NRC website is the Adam search engine and anyone 9
who does research and has used the Adam search engine 10 knows that it appears to be designed to divert you from 11 the subject you are trying to research.
12 You rarely find the document that you are 13 searching in the list of results for your search; even 14 if you put the exact title and the exact ML number, it 15 gives you everything else before that. So that you can 16 go through maybe ten pages of the list trying to find 17 the document and you may or may not find it. Who has 18 time to do that?
19 Well, it's irritating and it appears to be 20 deliberate because it is ongoing for year after year 21 after year. And we've got good search engines in this 22 world now and I just cannot see an excuse for it. So I 23 ask you to please address that issue and take that to 24 the Commissioners and reconsider the IT people that are 25
27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 doing your search engine and the work with the Nuclear 1
Regulatory Commission website.
2 Okay. That said, it was difficult. I 3
finally found it this morning but I do not have enough 4
time to address the issues in it. I do not have enough 5
time to study it, to give it the effort it deserves 6
because a considerable amount of effort went into 7
creating it and I'd like to give it the time.
8 So I detail in my written comments in detail 9
why it was frustrating and what went wrong and all of 10 that.
11 But I think it's something that you should 12 be proud of, that the NRC and the EPA and TVA should all 13 be saying we're reconsidering all this, we're looking 14 at this, we're going deeply into this. We want to keep 15 you safe. And I'm not getting that.
16 It's a detailed report, it's a long report 17 but there are a lot of issues that are not being 18 addressed. And so I'm going to try and address some of 19 them in the short amount of time I've had to prepare 20 this. Okay?
21 I want to say formally I want to request, 22 because of the difficulty in finding this article even 23 by someone who is used to searching online regularly, 24 that I want to request that there be an extension for 25
28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the public comment period.
1 I want to make a formal request for that and 2
I want to request that there be no further meetings of 3
the petition review board or any other entity 4
responsible for reviewing the appropriateness of 5
extending the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant operating licenses 6
for another 20 years, which is 50 percent beyond the two 7
reactors design basis life span.
8 That said, I will proceed to some new issues 9
as well as reiterating the issues previously submitted 10 for which we have received no response. But I was happy 11 to hear when I got here that David in fact responded to 12 them in this document which I have not been able to study 13 yet. Okay.
14 An irregular occurrence, something new 15 that's happened this year, was that the Sequoyah annual 16 effluents emission reports that usually come out in 17 April and May every year for every nuclear power plant, 18 the ones this year were not posted on the NRC website 19 until September 11th. So needless to say I had very 20 little time to work on those as well and I wrote the NRC 21 about it.
22 So it made me wonder why on earth would that 23 be the case? There were 1571 curies of liquid releases 24 this year and there were 145 batch releases on 145 days 25
29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 in our environment and that was of the liquid, and 142 1
of gas.
2 But what I found, and I do need to take just 3
a minute to say what I found with this, is that for seven 4
months we had beyond-the-limit releases of tritium in 5
our water, liquid releases were beyond the extremely 6
high picocuries per liter limit that is the law. So 7
those were kind of buried down at the bottom of the page.
8 They were not in sequence, those should have been at the 9
top up here and they were down here.
10 I'm just saying it's looking suspicious and 11 these are the figures. You can read them yourself and 12 see what it says and that is beyond the design basis.
13 So that is a concern and it concerns me. Is somebody 14 burying information? What's going on at NRC? Are you 15 all really protecting us? No matter what somebody 16 tells you to do at the NRC you all are working for the 17 entire United States citizens to keep us healthy and 18 safe. Okay. Thank you.
19 MR. HAGAR: Don Safer, you're next.
20 MR. SAFER: Again, Don Safer and I think 21 you have my information. Would you like me to repeat?
22 Thanks for this opportunity. It feels 23 frustrating because we did this about a year ago and, 24 yes, I saw my name in the comments being addressed but 25
30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the issues don't really ever seem to be addressed to my 1
satisfaction.
2 Just to put this in perspective, the 3
Fukushima accident is going to take 30 to 40 years to 4
clean up. Somewhere around 150,000 people were forced 5
to evacuate from their homes, some of them will never 6
-- most of them in fact will never be able to return.
7 Just recently a lot of health issues with 8
the children in Japan have been showing up. Certainly 9
a lot of thyroid issues, which was the case at Chernobyl, 10 but this is serious business and the fact is that a lot 11 of the repercussions and realities around Fukushima are 12 the subject of a pervasive cover up and even scientists 13 who study this.
14 I just saw a web-based press release of a 15 man and I don't have his name but it was sent out today, 16 a scientist who is saying that the effects of that 17 Fukushima accident and all of that radiation that was 18 released and is continuing to be released are much, 19 much, greater than the news media and the governments 20 are letting us know.
21 And I wish I could say that I had more 22 confidence in our government about nuclear issues but 23 the fact is that the U.S. government is just as secretive 24 and is keeping just as much from us about the dangers 25
31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 of nuclear technologies, whether it's depleted uranium 1
in weapons and the problems with soldiers coming back 2
or the problems with radioactive waste, whether it's low 3
level waste that is being created by these power plants 4
on a daily basis, and some 50 million pounds of comes 5
to Tennessee processors and is being incinerated and 6
melted and all shredded just for volume reduction and 7
a lot of worker exposure and a certain amount of public 8
exposure is happening. And then this high level waste.
9 We need to remember at the heart of this 10 process is the fissioning of uranium and plutonium and 11 that fissioning process creates isotopes that were 12 unknown really to the planet until we started doing it.
13 And the cesium 137 that is a great majority 14 of the radiation in these fuel rods, it'll be 15 radioactive for 300 years and it gets into our food, it 16 gets into our bodies, it wreaks havoc in our bodies.
17 And it's always being measured by the authorities as an 18 external source, but once it gets into your body it's 19 a different situation.
20 So forgive me for going off topic in terms 21 of the scoping but I just feel passionately that this 22 is such a mistake to continue creating this radioactive 23 waste.
24 And to that I think the biggest issue is 25
32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 renewable energy and the growth of renewable energy.
1 When these reactors were first approved and designed, 2
basically designed in the 1960s and, by the way, it's 3
a design called the ice condenser design, 3 million 4
pounds of chipped ice is hanging around the reactor core 5
and so the containment is thinner.
6 So there are a lot of studies, including 7
this book "Tritium on Ice" that you can get, that 8
indicate, and these were done by the U.S. government New 9
Reg what was it 1150 or something, that indicate these 10 ice condenser designs are the most likely to rupture in 11 the event of a loss of coolant accident.
12 So these things are not robust. Not near as 13 robust as what Three Mile Island is, that design that 14 did hold in the event of bad accident.
15 But speaking to this draft supplemental 16 environmental impact statement and the renewables, and 17 I know in your document you say in what, Section 2.0, 18 that it's not your job necessarily to deny an 19 application but you have to consider the potential 20 alternatives and determine whether the environmental 21 impacts of license renewal are so great that preserving 22 the option of license renewal would be unreasonable.
23 And that just brings up the convoluted 24 logic that is going on in the whole ball of wax. I mean 25
33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 all of the NRC's machinations to present the illusion 1
of safety of this technology in the thick document, 2
there are so many exclusions and well we can't consider 3
this and we can't consider the original design, so just 4
to -- and you can tell me when my five minutes is up, 5
we don't have a clock here.
6 Okay. Well, I'd like to come back.
7 MR. HAGAR: Well, let's give Gary Morgan 8
a chance to speak and then if we need to, Gretel and Don 9
we'll give you a second chance.
10 MR. MORGAN: I almost feel like I'm up 11 here in the dark. I am Gary Morgan, I am the director 12 of the Community Radiation Monitoring Project for 13 BEST/MATRR and I want to talk a little bit about this 14 generic environmental impact statement for licenses.
15 The two subjects which I'm going to discuss 16 is about radionuclide release to groundwater and also 17 waste management pollution prevention which is 18 highlighted in 3.13 and also 3.11 the human health 19 aspects of that.
20 I want to talk about the radionuclides 21 release to groundwater. My colleague, Ms. Johnston, 22 previously mentioned that. In 4-20 in this statement 23 it states: Groundwater contaminated as tritium is not 24 close to the site boundary and has been detected and has 25
34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 not been detected off-site. SQN. Neither the soil 1
structural fill nor the underlying [inaudible] group is 2
considered to be an aquifer or a source of water.
3 However, as Ms. Johnston mentioned, in the 4
wells, and I believe those wells are located south and 5
southwest of the nuclear power bloc, there was tritium 6
exceeding 20,000 picacuries per liter in those wells.
7 Now whether those wells are in close 8
proximity to an aquifer of course is not outlined 9
specifically in this environmental impact statement and 10 brings into question exactly the specific location of 11 those wells and how close they are to all underground 12 aquifers including the Tennessee River and any 13 tributaries of the Tennessee River.
14 This is a problem. Even though it is 15 on-site and the wells are off-site, you're not saying 16 anywhere in the data that I have reviewed and seen, that 17 it is not possible for that tritium to leak into a 18 groundwater supply which citizens may utilize. That's 19 that.
20 So I believe that is a deficiency of this 21 impact statement.
22 The second area concerns waste, the waste 23 that is stored at Sequoyah, the period it's going to be 24 stored which is for our purposes in here for all of us 25
35 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 basically infinity, we'll be long gone, the waste will 1
still be there.
2 So what are we going to do with this new 3
ruling that has been released, what are we going to do 4
with all the waste that's over there and for that matter 5
all the waste? But we're interested in Sequoyah.
6 There is an answer for that. We believe 7
there's an answer, the environmental community believes 8
there's an answer and there's a lot of learned people 9
that believe there's an answer to that and I actually 10 even believe the NRC and maybe even the TVA believe 11 there's an answer to this waste storage problem.
12 And that'll be HOSS. And I'm not talking 13 about Hoss Cartwright, I'm talking about Hardened 14 On-Site Storage.
15 Now how you store your waste is going to 16 affect the human environment as well as the biota, the 17 flora and fauna. Lord forbid there'll be a nuclear 18 accident where a fuel pool catches on fire that is 19 over-filled with waste, then we have a real problem 20 because, as you know, with a fuel pool fire you're going 21 to have a lot of waste, a lot of radioactivity released 22 into the environment and that can be partially prevented 23 by moving the waste into hardened storage canisters and 24 then you must secure that waste in the hardened secure 25
36 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 storage canisters properly.
1 And I don't see where that's addressed in 2
here.
3 Now I realize you've got a waste confidence 4
ruling and hopefully that will be addressed in the 5
future but we need to be thinking about this future right 6
here and now because this is going to affect us, our 7
children and our grandchildren.
8 And we don't want to have an accident, a 9
tornado to come through, of course and though the 10 hardened canisters are good to go for the tornados, even 11 the hardened canisters at Fukishama are storing the 12 waste. They didn't get moved by the tidal wave.
13 Hopefully if a dam breaks upstream, a 14 canister sitting out on the [inaudible] at Sequoyah will 15 not be moved by that. But to ensure security and safey 16 they need to be moved into a hardened site, a bunker-type 17 facility, either a vertical placement of the canisters 18 in or a horizontal placement of the canisters in a berm 19 covered so that it cannot be attacked by outside sources 20 or be threatened by inclement weather.
21 And basically I have outlined all these 22 concerns in the document and I'll give this to the court 23 reporter now if that's appropriate. Thank you very 24 much. Appreciate it.
25
37 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. HAGAR: Thank you, Gary. We've heard 1
from three people. Does anyone else want to make a 2
comment so we can add you to the rotation? And if not 3
then I'll ask these three speakers do you want a second 4
chance? So Gretel, please.
5 MS. JOHNSTON: I don't know about a second 6
chance but I would like to continue my questions and 7
point out some problems that I see and some issues that 8
I see.
9 One overriding consideration that I have 10 not seen in the previous environmental impact 11 statements, or in this draft supplemental environmental 12 impact statement, is the environmental impact of the 13 accumulation of radionuclides in the environment, in 14 the biosphere.
15 That is something that I do not see 16 addressed and it's such an important factor because 17 these don't go away. These radionuclides do not just go 18 away. They may transform, they radiate out energy 19 trying to stabilize and tritium which is the overriding 20 effluent, liquid effluent from this type of reactor that 21 Sequoyah is, is particularly insidious.
22 The reason that it is is because it actually 23 bonds with oxygen and transforms freshwater, H2O into 24 radioactive water H3O. And it cannot be filtered, it 25
38 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 cannot be destroyed because it becomes the water and 1
that water gets into our food chain. It's into the 2
grass, it's into the soil, it's into the river, it's into 3
the drinking water, it's into our bodies.
4 And in our bodies, no matter how long it's 5
there, it is flushed relatively quickly, a lot of it is, 6
not necessarily all of it is flushed relatively quickly 7
but it's still emitting the entire time it's inside of 8
our bodies. And it damages cells. We know that 9
radiation damages cellular structure and it damages DNA 10 and the lower doses are known to damage DNA and it can 11 break the structure of the DNA itself so that you get 12 long-term reproductive and hereditary damage.
13 So we're leaving this legacy to future 14 generations and it seems like such an unfair debt to the 15 future for us to leave that.
16 Another thing that I think needs to be 17 pointed out is that this radioactive water is already, 18 as I said, we had 1571 curies of it released into the 19 water, liquid releases, this last year. And the DOE is 20 proposing right now, in cooperation with the TVA, 21 adding from 6800 to 50,000 curies of radioactive tritium 22 into the river every year upstream of Chattanooga. And 23 that is a very large amount of tritium.
24 Curies, something we forget about curies, 25
39 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 is that curies are releasing radioactivity. They're 1
emitting at the rate of 37 billion disintegrations or 2
radiation emissions per second, 37 billion per second 3
is a curie.
4 It's hard for us to even fathom that but 5
when it gets in our bodies and it's in the water that 6
surrounds our DNA, because water cushions our DNA in our 7
biological systems, it can really do damage. And it may 8
not show up right away but once you start damaging DNA, 9
it's hard to repair.
10 Some people are better at repairing 11 cellular structure than others. Some people are 12 stronger that way. It's hard to know who's going to be 13 affected and who isn't. But radioactivity doesn't 14 respect boundaries.
15 So if we're seeing the tritium in the water 16 in the wells and we had over the limit, the EPA limit 17 during seven months that were reported last year, for 18 seven months, I don't know if this is an ongoing problem 19 now because they did not report in November and December 20 I noticed, but this is a problem.
21 It will not stay at the boundary of the 22 plant. Water tends to travel. It finds a way. It seeps, 23 as anyone who's ever had a leak anywhere in their house 24 knows, water finds a way. So it would be very difficult 25
40 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to keep it out of the river and a stream of Chattanooga 1
and Chattanooga gets its drinking water from the river.
2 So I think this is a major concern and the 3
accumulation, the cumulative effect I ask that you 4
please consider that. It is difficult. I know it's 5
not an easy subject to tackle but I think that an 6
environmental impact statement can't really be accurate 7
without considering the cumulative effect of 8
radioactivity. Thank you very much.
9 MR. HAGAR: Thank you, Gretel. Don?
10 MR. SAFER: Thanks. Once again, Don 11 Safer. I have a couple of questions. The whole question 12 of hydrology, all the dams, the 18 upstream dams from 13 Sequoyah or 18 upstream from Watts Bar, the whole 14 question of hydrology is holding back the licensing of 15 Watts Bar Unit 2, and I know that you don't answer 16 questions here but I want to raise the question as to 17 whether those same hydrological issues and questions 18 are being considered in the re-licensing? I haven't 19 been able to read all 481 pages so I don't have the answer 20 to that.
21 And then there's a whole issue of beyond 22 design basis accidents which are basically these large 23 catastrophic accidents and basically the NRC has always 24 used the -- I think -- faulty logic that because they 25
41 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 think the chances of a serious accident are so slim, they 1
don't have to consider the environmental impacts of an 2
accident of that nature.
3 The problem with that logic is they say it's 4
one in however many hundred reactor years or one in 5
however many thousand or whatever, but the simple fact 6
is that in the number of years that we've had nuclear 7
power operating in the world, we've had five major 8
meltdowns or explosions. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl 9
and the three reactors at Fukushima.
10 So that's five reactors out of the 400 or 11 so and if you do the math, and I don't have that number 12 right with me, the real world experience does not 13 confirm the hypothetical assessment and that brings 14 forth -- it's another brick in the wall that says the 15 NRC always assumes the best for the industry and 16 compromises public safety to keep the nuclear industry 17 going.
18 That was a historical problem that caused 19 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be split off of the 20 old Atomic Energy Commission and it's not a problem that 21 has gone away magically with the creation of this new 22 agency, new back in the '80s.
23 And I mean you're good people that work 24 there and I know there's a lot of sincerity but from an 25
42 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 observer -- and I try to be an unbiased observer -- it 1
just seems like the reason the room's not filled is that 2
everybody knows that this is going to be approved.
3 We asked last time, a year ago, how many 4
have not been approved and it was zero.
5 So getting back to what I wanted to say 6
about renewables. In 1972 when these reactors were 7
started or being built, it was a different world for 8
renewable energy. Today, the U.S. has 15 gigawatts 9
of solar, cumulative solar capacity. In the second 10 quarter of 2014, over 1000 megawatts was installed. That 11 is Sequoyah basically in one quarter in the United 12 States.
13 53 percent of all new electric capacity 14 came from solar in the first half of 2014. Wind energy 15 from 2001 to 2012, capacity went from 4000 megawatts to 16 over 60,000 megawatts in those 11 years. And that's 17 just a fraction of what we could have.
18 And there's a proposal to TVA right now for 19 wind power to be brought from Oklahoma direct current 20 to Memphis, be distributed, and TVA is dragging its feet 21 on this when it should be making every effort to get that 22 done.
23 There are countries in the world and there 24 are states that are way beyond us. Even Georgia is going 25
43 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 to have seven times the amount of solar by 2016 than 1
Tennessee will have. North Carolina is going to have 2
three times the amount.
3 We're falling behind and we're falling 4
behind from a lot of other countries and the simple fact 5
is the reality is that these technologies work today, 6
they get electrons to run through wires to provide our 7
lights and our cooling and everything else and they 8
don't need a billion dollar agency, the NRC, with 3,800 9
employees to create this illusion of safety and this 10 illusion of due consideration to the processes.
11 Every step of the way that I've followed, 12 they're weakening and it is at the behest of industry 13 and the industry is affecting the Congress and we all 14 know how things don't work in Washington. Well, this 15 is another thing that's not working in Washington and 16 I can tell you that California's getting 33 percent of 17 its power from renewables by 2020.
18 Denmark got 57 percent of its electricity 19 from wind in December 2013. Scotland got 40 percent of 20 its total electricity in 2012 from renewables. This is 21 happening here on the planet, it's happening now.
22 There's no reason it can't happen at TVA.
23 I know this is not necessarily an NRC issue 24 but I think there are grounds to start phasing out these 25
44 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 reactors with respect to the fact that there is no 1
solution to the waste. It's something that's been 2
worked on by some very smart people for many, many years 3
-- over 50 years -- and we still don't have any place 4
to put it. And we're not the only country that's in that 5
situation.
6 So thank you. I realize I may have run over 7
but I appreciate it.
8 MR. HAGAR: All right. Gary, would you 9
like to have a second shot? Come on up.
10 MR. MORGAN: Thank you, I appreciate the 11 time. And you know even though we may speak in 12 opposition to certain issues, one thing that makes our 13 nation so great is the ability to come forward and speak 14 to our government in such a fashion as we are doing.
15 It doesn't matter whether we may oppose an 16 issue or support an issue. The importance of this is 17 to address our government bodies in our system of 18 redress that we have. This is very important. I've seen 19 a lot of nations in the world, I'm an old retired 20 military guy, traveled the world over, you don't see 21 this in Russia. You don't see this in China. Evidently 22 in Japan you didn't see that very much either over there, 23 some of what we consider progressive type nations.
24 But there is one other thing. As I 25
45 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 mentioned before, I'm the director of the Community 1
Radiation Monitoring Project and there are some 2
concerns within the community up and down the river 3
here. We monitor radiation from Knoxville basically 4
over to the Mississippi-Alabama line Browns Ferry, 5
Sequoyah, Watts Bar and also we're concerned about 6
radiation coming off the Oak Ridge reservation. And 7
what's been dumped in the environs surrounding her from 8
Oak Ridge particularly.
9 But one point I do want to convey to you.
10 There is a problem in the Tennessee River Valley. I've 11 discussed this with some public relations people, I've 12 discussed this with the TVA. I have not discussed it in 13 depth with the NRC but I have discussed the problem with 14 cancer incident rates and mortality rates with many 15 learned people, to include college professors and 16 people in the field -- epidemiologists.
17 And there is a problem here. We are seeing 18 increased cancer rates, particularly here in East 19 Tennessee, not Hamilton County but the county north, Ray 20 County. It has the dubious distinction of being No. 1 21 in the state of Tennessee for cancer incidence rates and 22 No. 17 of all the counties in the United States for 23 cancer incidence rates.
24 We see strange cancers such as brain 25
46 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 cancer. We have a problem in Jackson County, which is 1
my home, where male brain cancers is extremely high.
2 Here in Hamilton County breast cancer is high. And we 3
do not know if radiation is a causative factor, if that 4
is the ideology of these cancers.
5 We suspect there are many different causes 6
but we asked the communities, we asked the NRC, the TVA, 7
we asked the public health departments of the various 8
states which are in the Tennessee Valley Region: help 9
us identify what is the degradation of the health in our 10 communities?
11 This is important. This is important to us 12 as people. This is important to our children and 13 grandchildren.
14 So I just want to leave at that word. We do 15 care. We appreciate the NRC. We appreciate the TVA in 16 keeping the power on and thank you very much, we 17 appreciate this opportunity.
18 MR. HAGAR: Well, thank you, Gary. All 19 right. We've heard from three speakers -- twice.
20 Does anyone else have any comments they want to provide 21 tonight?
22 Then let me remind all of you, at least one 23 of the speakers said she hadn't had time to review the 24 report before tonight's meeting, remind all of you that 25
47 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 the comment period is not closed tonight. You have at 1
least until September 29th to provide comments online 2
or by email or in writing and you can get the addresses 3
to do that in the copies of the presentation out on the 4
table.
5 I'd ask you again please fill out a meeting 6
feedback form and give it to a member of the staff or 7
mail it in.
8 Brian, do you want to make a few closing 9
comments?
10 MR. WITTICK: Well good evening. My name 11 is Brian Whittick. I'm the chief of the Environmental 12 Projects Branch in license renewal.
13 I'd like to thank everybody for taking the 14 time out on this Wednesday evening. I'm sure everybody 15 has busy lives and, as Gary said, it's very important 16 we at the NRC view it as one of our core values to be 17 open and transparent and to involve the public. We 18 value all of your comments and look forward to reviewing 19 them and providing insights into the finalizing of the 20 Environmental Impact Statement.
21 I'd like to thank David for your multiple 22 presentations today and Bob for facilitating the 23 meeting.
24 As Bob and David pointed out, there's still 25
48 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 12 days until the end of the public comment period of 1
course pending review of Gretel's request for 2
extension. Any other comments, we welcome all comments 3
that anyone may have.
4 Following this meeting we have a number of 5
folks from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that are 6
available for follow-on discussions. We welcome further 7
dialogue and we shall be around for some time as we pack 8
up and get ready to call it an evening. So with that I'll 9
turn it over to Bob to close the meeting. Thank you.
10 MR. HAGAR: All right. With a final 11 request for meeting feedback forms and to remind you 12 that the NRC staff will stay available for one-on-one 13 discussions, thank you all very much for your time and 14 this meeting is concluded.
15 (Whereupon, the Sequoyah Public Hearing 16 having been concluded, went off the record at 8:15 p.m.)
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
49 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 1
2 3
4 5
6